A Spy, a Shill, a Go-Between1, or a Sociologist: Unveiling the ‘Observer’ in Participant Observer

Abstract

Based on data gathered from two field research projects, the author examines two key questions that underlie her process of becoming a sociologist: (1) How did I negotiate my multiple identities in the field, and (2) What am I really, ‘a spy, a shill, a go-between’ or a sociologist? Drawing from Goffman’s dramaturgical model, the author contends that much of the process of becoming a sociologist occurs within the shifting front and back regions in the field. Through a systematic examination of her ‘personal’ and ‘methodological’ field notes, the author captures these shifts from front to back and back to front, and attempts to elucidate the moral, ethical, and professional decisions that must be traversed along the way. Her aim, in other words, is to show how the identity negotiations that characterize ‘doing fieldwork’ are a key element of the process of becoming a (moral and ethical) sociologist.

The Emotionality of Participation

“…As they had granted me permission to analyze their occupation, knowing that physical violence was a part of the package, I felt that expressing my judgment was simply inappropriate: I was there to analyze their actions, not judge or change them. However, in concurrence with Murray (2003), I believe that the ultimate goal and loyalty of our research is for our profession, however difficult recognizing this may be. Any act of violence is "ingrained with moral tension" (Hume 2007, 151) and contains a "deep moral bias" (Rodgers 2001, 3) on behalf of the researcher.…”

“…Unlike Murray (2003), I did not distinguish between personal, observational, or methodological notes. I also carried my tape recorder while on duty, but as it was practically impossible to record all twelve hours of each shift, I recorded conversations that I then deemed to be important.…”

Conducting critical ethnography in long-term residential care: experiences of a novice researcher in the field

“…In essence, being an outsider means that the researcher has little knowledge of the setting prior to immersion in participant observation and, conversely, being an insider means that the researcher already has some knowledge of the setting (Bonner & Tolhurst 2002). In reality, however, this binary can be deceiving because, a researcher occupies multiple identities and social positions in the research process (Murray 2003). And also, we are not only positioning ourselves in relation to these multiple selves but also we are constantly being positioned by those we are engaging with in the research process.…”

Changing personas and evolving identities: the contestation and renegotiation of researcher roles in fieldwork

“…My initial thoughts here were guided by a perceived need to adopt a position of 'neutrality' (Johnson, 1995). I was at pains to emphasize throughout the first week of fieldwork that I was not there to judge, just to record and try to understand what the various parties that constructed the context 'held true' (Murray, 2003). I wasn't a spy', I just wanted their experiences (Raeger, 2005).…”